• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Totalitarianism

FollowTheWay

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jesus. I believe what I used to consider as "liberal" objectives are actually in line with my faith and the Bible. Helping the poor, fighting against discrimination and hate, and being against unnecessary wars.
How can you justify Biblically being against these?
 

FollowTheWay

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
You forget the "least of my brethern". It does not necessarily mean Christian, but it does point to "in My Name". So no, an atheist who cares for the poor is not meeting the criteria of righteousness. Neither is a Democrat (or anyone else, I'm just using the democrats because they are an evil that does try to feed the poor) who feeds the poor but advocates immorality and leads others into depravity.
The Democrats are not the real evil. Just like Christ, I believe the real evil is the hypocrites. I see more of them as being "evangelical Christian" Republicans.
 

FollowTheWay

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Yes, they got less coverage, and co pays from 1000 to 6000 a year!
And monthly bill 200 more, asObama care really hurt those who had good company coverage, as many companies switched off to it instead!
You're talking about people that were previously uninsured? I don't think so.
 

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
The Democrats are not the real evil. Just like Christ, I believe the real evil is the hypocrites. I see more of them as being "evangelical Christian" Republicans.
So you interpret Christ's words against hypocrisy to condone sin as long as you are honest about it?
 

FollowTheWay

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
So you interpret Christ's words against hypocrisy to condone sin as long as you are honest about it?
No. As Paul said in Romans:

[Rom 5:19-21 KJV] 19 For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous. 20 Moreover the law entered, that the offence might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound: 21 That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord.

[Rom 6:1-4 KJV] 1 What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? 2 God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein? 3 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? 4 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.
 

FollowTheWay

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Far better to have nothing done than the chaos caused by doing things such as Obama Care!
You wouldn't consider it chaos if you were one of the millions of people who were able to get insurance for the first time. Consider living without medical insurance. Not only does this increase your anxiety and feeling of helplessness but one major medical problem can make you lose your house and bankrupt you.
 

FollowTheWay

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Provide for the truly needy by private insurance and by charity and churches, NOT by using wasteful bloated govt program whose main goal is to socialize big brother!

And is fighting isalmic terrorism a meaningless war?
I did the calculation. I think it came out that every Christian church in America would have to contribute $200,000 to meet the need. Some churches could do that but not most. Why waste more money on the already bloated military budget? Why not spend it to help the needy?
 

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
Jesus. I believe what I used to consider as "liberal" objectives are actually in line with my faith and the Bible. Helping the poor, fighting against discrimination and hate, and being against unnecessary wars.
I agree with those objectives. I am not sure why you used to consider them as "liberal" as this goal is not limited to one party or group. The difference is how that goal is achieved.

What I oppose is seeking to achieve those objectives via any means. We are called to "be Christ" to the world (not just to tell people of the love of God but to love people with the love of God). But we are called to do this "kingdom work" through kingdom means.

The Democrat Party is Progressive Humanism, which focuses on helping the poor, fighting inequality, discrimination, hate,and unnecessary wars (admirable goals). The slogan is "good without a god". I am not saying that they are not trying to do good (they are). Perhaps this is why they are such a dangerous evil. They strive to do "good without a god". We are responsible for what we support, not only in politics but in everything.

I am not a Republican for similar reasons. While their platform is not directly immoral, I believe that the goal (those "liberal objectives", as you put it) cannot be reached through political means. My ties are to Christ. As a Christian I cannot support immorality. I cannot be "for Christ" and "against Christ" at the same time. I do not believe we, as Christians, need to strive to do "good without a god".
 

Yeshua1

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jesus. I believe what I used to consider as "liberal" objectives are actually in line with my faith and the Bible. Helping the poor, fighting against discrimination and hate, and being against unnecessary wars.
And by denying right to life for babies, and for having support for life styles abomination to God then?
 

FollowTheWay

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I agree with those objectives. I am not sure why you used to consider them as "liberal" as this goal is not limited to one party or group. The difference is how that goal is achieved.

What I oppose is seeking to achieve those objectives via any means. We are called to "be Christ" to the world (not just to tell people of the love of God but to love people with the love of God). But we are called to do this "kingdom work" through kingdom means.

The Democrat Party is Progressive Humanism, which focuses on helping the poor, fighting inequality, discrimination, hate,and unnecessary wars (admirable goals). The slogan is "good without a god". I am not saying that they are not trying to do good (they are). Perhaps this is why they are such a dangerous evil. They strive to do "good without a god". We are responsible for what we support, not only in politics but in everything.

I am not a Republican for similar reasons. While their platform is not directly immoral, I believe that the goal (those "liberal objectives", as you put it) cannot be reached through political means. My ties are to Christ. As a Christian I cannot support immorality. I cannot be "for Christ" and "against Christ" at the same time. I do not believe we, as Christians, need to strive to do "good without a god".
I said I didn't consider them to be liberal as most here argue but rather Christian values.
 

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
I said I didn't consider them to be liberal as most here argue but rather Christian values.
I do not know most here argue that caring for the poor, fighting inequality, discrimination, hate and unnecessary wars are liberal values. You are right that these are Christian values, not liberal ones.

In terms of progressive humanism (the Democrat Platform) these "Christian values" are goals that will prove unrealized through their agenda because they strive to reach these goals through ungodliness. I suspect that the same will prove true of the Republican Party simply because truly caring for the poor, truly fighting inequality, truly opposing discrimination and hate, and truly standing against unnecessary wars extends beyond political agenda and can only be realized through kingdom means and through the Body of Christ and reconciliation in Christ.

What I oppose is not those Christian values but an evil that has claimed those values as a facade while promoting sinfulness, praising iniquity, and driving men deeper into bondage and slavery. This is obviously representative of the Democrat Party, but I am not so sure that it is not also telling of the Republican Party if you were to scratch the surface.

We (as a whole) need to exercise more caution when yoking our churches to any political party.
 
Top